Why won't he support this?<br><br>Bush Stands by Rejection of Kyoto Treaty<br><br>This is just disgusting. The U.S. helped create it, and now even Russia is agreeing to sign. Maybe we could just replace the statue of liberty with a giant statue of a middle finger? <br><br><br><br>

Why why why? It would cost his sponsors and shareholders and.... lots of $$$, that's why... <br><br>And there are a few hundred good reasons why him and his "friends" would be making less $$ if he signed it. <br><br>Business, business, business... ignorance... selfishness... greed... <br><br>_________________________________________<br>Just a different kinda geek...

_________________________
_________________________________________"The United States is by far the largest exporter of weapons in the world, selling more weapons than the next 14 countries combined."

Not that I agree, but I think Bush only sees economic setbacks and jobs lost instead of the benefits of cleaning up the earth.<br><br>Personally, I think you'll see more success in a plan that calls for research going into more efficient manufacturing and fuel burning than simply saying everyone must use less fuel. For example, if a factory spews x tons of pollution in the air, what can be done to capture those pollutants in the factory before being spewed in the air? That will even create more jobs in the environmental product industry.<br><br>Though in my opinion, a mixture of both would be the most successful. Burn less fuel *and* capture the emissions from the fuel that is burned.<br><br><br>

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Why won't he support this?<p><hr></blockquote><p>Why is everyone so gung ho on supporting a treaty that most forecasts show is only a 5 year stop gap at best? Of course Russia will sign it, they can actually increase emissions under the treaty! They've got nothing to lose!<br><br>I suppose the nearly 20,000 climate scientists and physicists that signed a petition against the Kyoto treaty, including a good deal of the ones that helped write the UN report don't count for anything?<br><br>People like to talk about global warming with religious fervor. Kyoto is a waste of money. Yes, we should certainly clean up and reduce emissions, I'm not arguing that. However Kyoto would cost the world 5 trillion dollars over it's course. Wouldn't that be money better spent helping enrich the poorer countries of the earth who won't be able to deal with global warming? Man after all is a contributor to it, not the sole cause and we know even if we reduced emissions to zero the Earth would continue warming. Instead of trying to control something we ultimately have no control over, why aren't we preparing?<br><br>I think everyone is barking up the wrong tree, and it will cost millions of lives in the end. Kyoto isn't the salvation people tout it to be. If we're going to do it we need to do it right. Why are the negatives about global warming always presented, but not the positives (yes there are positives), and the negatives of trying to control it never explored? <br><br>Here's a link to an excellent article wr...ht thing to do.<br><br>

Yes, excellent!<br><br>Funny that people love to tout Al Gore's panel of "5000" scientists (even though a small minority of them were actually qualified) on global warming, but never seem to mention the 20,000 highly qualified climate scientists and physicists who signed the petition against the Kyoto treaty.<br><br>Even funnier is that most of the scientists who were on that original UN panel signed the petition against Kyoto too!!<br><br>The global warming nuts treat it like religion. There is never an intelligent discussion on global warming. If you're not for giving up your car and air conditioning, and immediately cutting emissions then you're using shady science and are a nut! Even though in reality that would likely do more immediate harm than any small good it would produce.<br><br>All the best stuff I've found and read suggest to me mans activities contribute roughly 15-20% of the total warming trend. Which if you ask me, it's futile to try and curb. The earth changes with or without our help, always has and always will. Why are we surprised by that? And more importantly why does it take us by surprise? <br><br>And most importantly, why aren't more people asking the important and frank questions like Bjorn Lomborg (and me dammit!)? Nope, we're the nuts.<br><br>They hide behind social conciousness and "doing the world good", but in the end it's still politics. If they really did care, they'd look at the options of taking the money this joke called kyoto would cost and redirecting it elsewhere. They'd discuss these options. Something that would make sense and actually *save lives*!!<br><br>

"Funny that people love to tout Al Gore's panel of "5000" scientists (even though a small minority of them were actually qualified) on global warming, but never seem to mention the 20,000 highly qualified climate scientists and physicists who signed the petition against the Kyoto treaty."<br><br>Actually, I'm surprised there are even 5000, let alone 20,000 highly qualified climate scientists and physicists alive. I don't think Al Gore's panel or the petition has any merit.<br><br>

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Of course Russia will sign it, they can actually increase emissions under the treaty! <p><hr></blockquote><p><br>And don't forget that Russia can sell the credits in emmissions that they do not use. <br><br>

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>If they really did care, they'd look at the options of taking the money this joke called kyoto would cost and redirecting it elsewhere. They'd discuss these options. Something that would make sense and actually *save lives*!!<p><hr></blockquote><p>It's not about results it's about symbolism over substance.<br><br>

Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.

All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.